Supreme Court Stays Demolition Of CSI Church Built As Community Hall In Tamil Nadu's Tenkasi District

The Supreme Court on Friday (October 16) stayed the demolition of a Church of South India (CSI) church in Thippanampatti village in Tamil Nadu's Tenkasi district, in a plea challenging the High Court order finding the structure unauthorised and ordering its restoration as a community hall.

A bench of Justice Vikram Nath, Justice R Mahadevan and Justice Aparesh Singh issued notice on the plea filed by the church trust.

Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi appeared for the church trust.

The case concerns a building constructed by the Tirunelveli Diocesan Trust Association, which was granted permission in 2014 to construct a community hall called the “Church of South India Community Hall”. The association contends that the building has since been used as a church by the local Christian community, with regular prayers and religious services being conducted peacefully.

The Trust on March 4, 2024, sought recognition of the community hall as a place of worship and permission for the church tower. However, the District Collector rejected the application on June 25, 2024, refusing permission to convert the community hall into a church and to construct the tower. The Collector's decision was challenged by the Trust before the Madras High Court.

Before the High Court, the State argued that the original permission covered only a community hall and no approval had been obtained for a spire erected on the building. Relying on Rule 4(3) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Building Rules, 1997, the State submitted that prior approval of the District Collector was mandatory for a site intended to be used for public worship or religious purposes. The rule permits the Collector to refuse approval if the proposed use is likely to endanger public peace and order.

The State further relied on reports submitted by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tenkasi, and the Superintendent of Police, Tenkasi, which apprehended law-and-order problems if the church was allowed to continue functioning.

In its October 1 judgment, the Madras High Court dismissed the association's challenge to the District Collector's refusal to permit the conversion of the community hall into a church. The High Court also directed the Collector to take steps to demolish the unapproved structure and restore it to its originally approved use within four weeks of receiving a copy of the order.

The High Court in its judgment noted that the original permission was for a community hall and a spire had subsequently been erected without approval, resulting in the building being used as a church.

It held that the Collector's decision, based on the reports of the revenue and police authorities and the absence of prior approval for the religious structure, did not suffer from illegality or arbitrariness warranting judicial interference.

It also noted that the village had approximately 450 Hindu families and 10 Christian families. It accepted the authorities' concerns, including the assessment that there was a “rift between two religious groups,” and found no illegality or arbitrariness in the Collector's decision.

The High Court noted that one of the residents of the area had initiated a PIL against the violation caused by the petitioner by putting up a place for religious worship by constructing a building, which did not have the proper legal approval. The Court opined that this is a “clear sign that there is definitely a rift between two religious groups, though not it has brewed to a greater extent.”

The association has thus approached the Supreme Court challenging the High Court's decision.

The Trust has argued before the Supreme Court that the High Court's directions violate the constitutional protections afforded to religious minorities under Articles 14, 25 and 26 of the Constitution. It has contended that the church has functioned peacefully for years and that there have been no complaints, FIRs or confrontations indicating a law-and-order problem in the village.

The Trust has disputed the apprehension of communal tensions, arguing that the relative number of families belonging to different religions cannot, by itself, justify denying a minority community permission to worship. It has also contended that the authorities failed to substantiate the apprehended law-and-order concerns.

“Over the century, no law-and-order issue or conflict with other groups has arisen. There is not a shred of documentation to suggest c that the Christian community was not conducting its religious affairs peacefully…The only averment to suggest that there are lawand order issues has been made to the fact that there are 450 Hindu families in the village and only about 10 Christians families. These numbers, by themselves, however do not remotely suggest that there is any law and-order situation in the area”, the trust contends.

The plea further adds, “The only one person objecting to the functioning of the church is Respondent No. 1, who does not represent the 450 Hindu families in the village who have cordial relations with the Christians families. In this regard, the finding of the High Court that "there is definitely a rift between two religious groups" is wholly baseless and unsubstantiated.”